Priscilla Porras v. Tempest Recovery Services, Inc. (Servicing Agent for Premier Auto Finance)
Priscilla Porras v. Tempest Recovery Services, Inc. (Servicing Agent for Premier Auto Finance)
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 2-08-002-CV
PRISCILLA PORRAS APPELLANT
V.
TEMPEST RECOVERY SERVICES, APPELLEE
INC. (SERVICING AGENT FOR
PREMIER AUTO FINANCE)
------------
FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF TARRANT COUNTY
------------
MEMORANDUM OPINION[1]
------------
On July 22, 2008, we notified Appellant Priscilla Porras that her brief did not comply with rules 9.4(h) and 38.1(a)B(j) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.[2] On August 12, 2008, we notified Appellant that her amended brief did not comply with rules 9.4(h) and 38.1(a), (d), (f), (g), (h), and (j).[3] We allowed Appellant until August 22, 2008 to file a second amended brief that complied with the above rules. We stated in our letter to Appellant that her failure to do so would result in our striking her brief and dismissing her appeal for want of prosecution.[4] On August 25, 2008, we received Appellant=s second amended brief. It does not comply with rules 38.1(a), (d), (f), and (h).[5]
Accordingly, we strike Appellant=s brief and dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution.[6]
PER CURIAM
PANEL: DAUPHINOT, HOLMAN, and GARDNER, JJ.
DELIVERED: September 11, 2008
[1]See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
[2]See Tex. R. App. P. 9.4(h), 38.1(a)B(j).
[3]See Tex. R. App. P. 9.4(h), 38.1(a), (d), (f), (g), (h), (j).
[4]See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a), 38.9(a), 42.3.
[5]See Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(a), (d), (f), (h).
[6]See Tex. R. App. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b), (c).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.